The 2017 General Political discussion thread, Part 2!

[SheepDog4Life]

The WH is asking for some publically available information, and I'm generally ok with that. I'm not ok with them requesting the non-public info.

The WH commission request letter literally says "if publicly available under the laws of your state". They have requested NO non-public information... none, nada, zilch, zippo, squat and diddly-squat. Lol!

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...iscussion-thread-part-2-a-47.html#post7147999

 

[SheepDog4Life]

The idea of rules/customs of war is pretty ridiculous in the first place.

They define the difference between war and crimes. Generally, killing people and blowing up things is highly illegal.

 

[Kutnupe14]

They define the difference between war and crimes. Generally, killing people and blowing up things is highly illegal.

Not when the people being blown up are active combatants and actively trying to kill each other.

 

[Kutnupe14]

The WH commission request letter literally says "if publicly available under the laws of your state". They have requested NO non-public information... none, nada, zilch, zippo, squat and diddly-squat. Lol!

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...iscussion-thread-part-2-a-47.html#post7147999

So the WH is more inept that one would think, if they think that they could come to a comprehensive conclusion based on differing submitted criteria from different states. That makes their request even more suspect. lol

 

[Dddrees]

No telling with Trump how many of these we'll get left out of.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/06/business/economy/japan-eu-trade-agreement.html

Yeah team, let's make America Great Again.

 

[Kutnupe14]

No telling with Trump how many of these we'll get left out of.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/06/business/economy/japan-eu-trade-agreement.html

Yeah team, let's make America Great Again.

The US auto industry is about to take a hit with that.

 

[Dddrees]

The US auto industry is about to take a hit with that.

This has always been one of my major concerns with Trump and even Hillary when she changed her position on the TPP. How in the H*** are we going to be so great if we don't have trading partners. You really think we can really be successful ignoring all others and just trading with ourselves?

The things he's setting in motion now will certainly last long after he's no longer in office. You really have to be concerned on what kind of damage he is going to inflict on our economic future.

 

[IndyDave1776]

No telling with Trump how many of these we'll get left out of.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/06/business/economy/japan-eu-trade-agreement.html

Yeah team, let's make America Great Again.

Oh the horror. We might get left out of yet another trade deal where we are expected not only to drop our pants and grab our ankles, but also bring our own vaseline.

I would also add that a bilateral agreement between two governments does not exclude us from doing business with either. I, for one, am sick and tired of 'free trade' in one direction but not the other, which seems to be the end product of most multilateral trade agreements. For example, GATT was negotiated in such a way as to give China tremendous advantages for which there would appear to be no justifiable reason other than disloyalty among our own leaders who demonstrate a nasty habit of getting rich by being disloyal.

 

[Dddrees]

Oh the horror. We might get left out of yet another trade deal where we are expected not only to drop our pants and grab our ankles, but also bring our own vaseline.

I would also add that a bilateral agreement between two governments does not exclude us from doing business with either. I, for one, am sick and tired of 'free trade' in one direction but not the other, which seems to be the end product of most multilateral trade agreements. For example, GATT was negotiated in such a way as to give China tremendous advantages for which there would appear to be no justifiable reason other than disloyalty among our own leaders who demonstrate a nasty habit of getting rich by being disloyal.

Well the problem very likely might not just be this one but many others. Sure we could conduct some trade but how much trade do you think gets conducted when you have a preferred trading partner vs one that is not?

 

[Dddrees]

Since Trump just happens to be in Germany now let's see how this develops. Another thing to be concerned with if you happen to have any interest in our economic well being.

Germany's ambassador warns*Trump: Don't start a trade war

 

[IndyDave1776]

Well the problem very likely might not just be this one but many others. Sure we could conduct some trade but how much trade do you think gets conducted when you have a preferred trading partner vs one that is not?

There are few things from outside the United States that we truly need. Since World War II, the cost of having 'preferred' trading partners has amounted to trade agreements that are grossly out of balance in the favor of others. Volume will NOT make up for a losing deal, it simply allows you to lose more money faster. I will also point out that Trump has made clear that isolation isn't his goal but rather negotiating bilateral trade deal that are beneficial to us rather than establishing us as a resource to be used for the benefit of the rest of the world. You appear fixated on the binary choice between having trade agreements on everyone else's terms or going full isolationist. The truth is that we don't have to choose one or the other between isolation and being the rest of the world's b*tch.

 

[Denny347]

There are few things from outside the United States that we truly need.

Perhaps, but what the vast majority of what people WANT comes from overseas. Heck, 98% of the clothing we wear is imported.

 

[Kutnupe14]

There are few things from outside the United States that we truly need. Since World War II, the cost of having 'preferred' trading partners has amounted to trade agreements that are grossly out of balance in the favor of others. Volume will NOT make up for a losing deal, it simply allows you to lose more money faster. I will also point out that Trump has made clear that isolation isn't his goal but rather negotiating bilateral trade deal that are beneficial to us rather than establishing us as a resource to be used for the benefit of the rest of the world. You appear fixated on the binary choice between having trade agreements on everyone else's terms or going full isolationist. The truth is that we don't have to choose one or the other between isolation and being the rest of the world's b*tch.

This isn't 1980, an we live in International economy. Americans like cheap things.... cheap things made by cheap workers. American workers aren't cheap. If we're shut out of the international market, expect MORE companies to leave our shores, to employ cheaper workers so that they can sell cheap things in America. And if you hold that tariffs will be applied, to those companies, then you will simply see people not buy... leading to severely diminished standard of living.

 

[jamil]

About the voter information given to the fed. Generally I'd rather see voter information remain federated. It should mostly be non of the federal government's business what is voters' party affiliation, for example. It should only be the state's business to the extent that it is required for closed primaries. For states with open primaries, party affiliation is non of the state's business.

I do think there's value in settling the question of voter fraud with a credible investigation. And I think it is okay for states to provide some information to help do that, if it's transparency and oversight for how that information is used. Those states who are just flat out refusing because #resist, are not contributing to a credible investigation. If they believe so strongly that there is no voter fraud, then why not just help keep the investigation credible? And there's a credibility concern with the way Trump seems to be going about this as well. But in both cases, it's something that transparency and oversight would help overcome.

There are some things states could probably do to help make their elections less questionable. For example, we keep hearing stories about all the dead people on the voter rolls. I think it's very reasonable to assume that at least some people are voting in the place some of those dead people. Voter ID should mostly help, but a lot of states say it disenfranchises voters. So if those states were actually serious about having clean voter rolls, why not run the voter rolls against SSA DMF records and flag the hits. Then have someone do the legwork to determine if that flagged person is actually dead. If they're serious about having valid elections, that is.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

So the WH is more inept that one would think, if they think that they could come to a comprehensive conclusion based on differing submitted criteria from different states. That makes their request even more suspect. lol

Exactly the opposite, Kut. Seeking the best available data from each source (each state) is the logical way to do it.

No telling with Trump how many of these we'll get left out of.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/06/business/economy/japan-eu-trade-agreement.html

Yeah team, let's make America Great Again.

I read the article... Japan and the EU are on opposite ends regarding the dispute resolution mechanism. Until they agree on dispute resolution, it's all fairy farts.

 

[Dddrees]

There are few things from outside the United States that we truly need. Since World War II, the cost of having 'preferred' trading partners has amounted to trade agreements that are grossly out of balance in the favor of others. Volume will NOT make up for a losing deal, it simply allows you to lose more money faster. I will also point out that Trump has made clear that isolation isn't his goal but rather negotiating bilateral trade deal that are beneficial to us rather than establishing us as a resource to be used for the benefit of the rest of the world. You appear fixated on the binary choice between having trade agreements on everyone else's terms or going full isolationist. The truth is that we don't have to choose one or the other between isolation and being the rest of the world's b*tch.

You really should be telling that story to the workers in the States where their jobs depend on international trade. It's not just about what we import but what we export as well.

 

[indiucky]

 

[Dddrees]

Exactly the opposite, Kut. Seeking the best available data from each source (each state) is the logical way to do it.



I read the article... Japan and the EU are on opposite ends regarding the dispute resolution mechanism. Until they agree on dispute resolution, it's all fairy farts.

Well as long as all the new trade agreements don't include us then none of the possibilities do either. So when all the possibilities include others then we're not only standing still but our economy grows weaker as others pass us by. If you think we can turn a blind eye and exist on our own then your lying to yourself.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Perhaps, but what the vast majority of what people WANT comes from overseas. Heck, 98% of the clothing we wear is imported.

Why does it have to be that way? I read several years ago about a certain entrepreneur who found that clothing could be made domestically and put on the shelf with a premium of no more than 10% on the price. The biggest problem was regulatory nonsense including the regulations on labor which were more focused on social justice than allowing employers to hire people who are capable of doing the job and willing to do so.

This isn't 1980, an we live in International economy. Americans like cheap things.... cheap things made by cheap workers. American workers aren't cheap. If we're shut out of the international market, expect MORE companies to leave our shores, to employ cheaper workers so that they can sell cheap things in America. And if you hold that tariffs will be applied, to those companies, then you will simply see people not buy... leading to severely diminished standard of living.

You are arguing against yourself. If we shut out imports (which is not necessarily the goal as equal terms would be a vast improvement) there will be no one leaving to make cheap goods overseas. It is possible to maintain a decent standard of living without this nonsense, and besides, in case you hadn't noticed, our standard of living is decreasing already. The difference is that you don't see it so much right now given the number of people maintaining the standard of living on credit for which their parents paid cash. It becomes a game of quenching thirst by cutting your own throat to drink your own blood. If you honestly believe that importing cheap foreign goods at a net loss is good for us, there really isn't anything I can do to help you.

You really should be telling that story to the workers in the States where their jobs depend on international trade. It's not just about what we import but what we export as well.

Two major errors for the price of one!

First, as a net importer, if we shut the doors and lived on a national economy, the loss in international trade jobs should be make up with more domestically focused jobs than were lost.

Second, you offer yet another false dilemma based on making it a binary choice when it isn't. Trade agreements that are actually beneficial to us are a third option, and Trump is right that the best way to do this is with a series of bilateral agreements rather than an 'everybody gather round the table' system of negotiating in which most walk away winners while we never do. The bottom line is that we are not limited to choosing between sealing the borders or getting bent over a barrel. Why do you insist on painting it in the terms that those are our only choices?

 

[Dddrees]

Why does it have to be that way? I read several years ago about a certain entrepreneur who found that clothing could be made domestically and put on the shelf with a premium of no more than 10% on the price. The biggest problem was regulatory nonsense including the regulations on labor which were more focused on social justice than allowing employers to hire people who are capable of doing the job and willing to do so.



You are arguing against yourself. If we shut out imports (which is not necessarily the goal as equal terms would be a vast improvement) there will be no one leaving to make cheap goods overseas. It is possible to maintain a decent standard of living without this nonsense, and besides, in case you hadn't noticed, our standard of living is decreasing already. The difference is that you don't see it so much right now given the number of people maintaining the standard of living on credit for which their parents paid cash. It becomes a game of quenching thirst by cutting your own throat to drink your own blood. If you honestly believe that importing cheap foreign goods at a net loss is good for us, there really isn't anything I can do to help you.



Two major errors for the price of one!

First, as a net importer, if we shut the doors and lived on a national economy, the loss in international trade jobs should be make up with more domestically focused jobs than were lost.

Second, you offer yet another false dilemma based on making it a binary choice when it isn't. Trade agreements that are actually beneficial to us are a third option, and Trump is right that the best way to do this is with a series of bilateral agreements rather than an 'everybody gather round the table' system of negotiating in which most walk away winners while we never do. The bottom line is that we are not limited to choosing between sealing the borders or getting bent over a barrel. Why do you insist on painting it in the terms that those are our only choices?

Sorry but building a wall around the entire country and ignoring all around us will neither completely solve our immigration issues nor fix our trade issues. It's also not going to enhance our economic situation to completely withdraw within our own boarders. In fact isolationism is only going to make us weaker. I really hope we don't get passed by on all of this, I really do. But time will tell, it most certainly will. Ten or fifteen years from now when we look back at choices we made now I really hope we're not regretting those same stupid choices to ignore everyone else because we thought we were to good for everyone else but ourselves. I wonder how helpful they will be then or how weak we are because we cut our own nose off to spite ourselves.